
THE WAR AVITII MEXICO. 



SPEECH 



1 



HON. JOHN A. DIX, OF NEW YOEK, 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 26, 1848, 

On the Bill reported from the Committee on Military Jlffairs to raise, for a limited time, 

an additional Military Force. 



Mr. DIX said : Mr. President, it was my wish 
to address the Senate on the resohuions ofi'ered by 
the Senator from South Carohna, [Mr. Calhou.v,] 
and not on tliis bill. I should have preferred to do 
so, because I am always unwilling to delay action 
on any measure relating to the war, and because 
the resolutions afford a wider field for inquiry and 
discussion. But as the debate has become general, 
and extended to almost every topic that can well 
be introduced under either, the force of the consid- 
erations by which I have been influenced, has be- 
come so weakened, that I have not thought it neces- 
sary to defer longer what I wish to say. 

Two leading questions divide and agitate the 
public mind in respect to the future conduct of the 
war with Mexico. The first of these questions is. 
Shall we withdraw our forces from the Mexican 
territory, and leave the subject of indemnity for 
injuries and the adjustment of a boundary be- 
tween the two Republics to future negotiation, re- 
lying on a magnanimous course of conduct on our 
pait to produce a corresponding feeling on the |iart 
of Mexico .' There are other propositions, subor- 
dinate to this, which may be considered as parts 
of the same general scheme of policy, such as that 
of withdrawing from the Mexican capital and the 
interior districts, and assuming an exterior line of 
occupation. I shall apply to all these propositions 
the same arguments; and if I were to undertake to 
distinguish between them, I atn not sure that I 
should make any difference in the force of the ap- 
plication. For whether we withdraw from Mex- 
ico altogether, or take a defensive line which shall 
include all the territory we intend to hold pertna- 
nently as indemnity, the consequences to result 
from it, so far as they affect the question of peace, 
would, it appears to mc, be the same. 

The second question is, Shall we retain the 
possession of the territory we liave acquired until 
Mexico shall consent to make a treaty of peace 
which shall piovide ample compensation for the 
wrongs of which we complain, and settle to our 
satisfaction the boundary m dispute.' 

Regarding these questions as involving the per- 
roancnt welfare of the country, I have considered 
thecal with the greatest solicitude; and though 
nevei more profoundly impressed with a sense of 
the resiponsibility which belongs to the solution 
of problems of such magnitude and difficulty, my 

Priiitedat ihe^CongressioimTGlobe Oflice^ 



reflections have, nevertheless, led me to a clear 
and settled conviction as to the course which just- 
ice and policy seem to indicate and demand. The 
first question, in it-selfof the highest importance, 
has been answered afiirmatively on this floor; and 
it derives additional interest from the fact, that it 
has also been answered in the afiirmative by a 
statesman, now retired from the busy scenes of 
political life, who, from his talents, experience, 
and public services, justly commands the re.spect 
of his countrymen, and whose opinions on any 
subject are entitled to be weighed with candor and 
deliberation. 1 have endeavored to attribute to 
his opinions, and to those of others who coincide 
with him wholly or in part, all the importance 
which belongs to them, and to consider them with 
the deference due to the distinguished sources 
from which they emanate. I believe I have done 
so; and yet I have, after the fullest reflection, 
come to conclusions totally diflerent from theirs. 
I believe it would be in the highest degree unjust 
to ourselves, possessing, as we do, well-founded 
claims on Mexico, to withdraw our forces from 
her territory altogether, and exceedingly unwise, 
as a matter of policy, looking to the future politi- 
cal relations of the two countries, to withdrav^ 
from it partially, and assume a line of defence, 
without a treaty of peace. On the contrary, I am 
in favor of retaining possession, for the preaent, 
of all Vk'e have acquired, not as a permanent con- 
quest, but as the most effective means of bringing 
about, what all most earnestly desire, a restora- 
tion of peace; and I will, with the indulgence of 
the Senate, proceed to state, with as much brerity 
as the magnitude of the subject admits, my objec- 
tions to the course suggested by the first question, 
and my reasons in favor of the course suggested 
by the other. 

I desire, at the outset, to state this proposition, 
to the truth of which, 1 tliink, all will yield their 
assent: that no policy which does not carry with 
it a reasonable assurance of healing the dissensions 
dividing the two countries, and of restoring, per- 
manently, amicable relations between them, ought 
to receive our support. We may difier in opinion, 
and, perhaps, hopelessly, as to the measures best 
calculated to produce this result; but if it were pos- 
sible for us to come to an agreement in respect 
to them, the propriety of their adoption could 



r 






arcely udmit of controversy. This proposition 
^ciiiy conceded, as I think it will be, it follows, that 
if tlie measure proposed — to witlulraw our forces 
from Mexico — be not calculated to bring about a 
speedy and permanent peace; but, on the contrary, 
if it be rather calculated to open a field of domestic 
dissension, and possibly of external interference, 



period exceeding fifteen thousand men, and against 
forces from three to five times more numerous than 
those actually engaged on our side, in every conflict 
since the fall of Vera Cruz. 

I had occasion, on presenting some army peti- 
tions a few weeks ago, to refer to the brilliant suc- 
cesses by which these acquisitions were made; and 



in that distracted country, to be followed, in all I will not trespass on the attention of the Senate 



probability, by a renewal of active hostilities with 
us, and under circumstances to make us feel se- 
verely the loss of the advantage which we have 
gained, and wliich it is proposed voluntarily to 
surrender, — then, it appears to me, it can present 
no claim to our favorable consideration. I shall 
endeavor to show, before I sil down, that the pol- 
icy referred to is exposed to all these dangers and 
evils. 

I do not propose to enter into an examination 
of the origin of the war. From the moment the 
collision took place between our forces and those 
of Mexico on the Rio Grande, I considered all hope 
of an accommodation, withoutafuU trial of strength 
in the field, to be out of the question. 1 believed 
the peculiar character of the Mexicans would ren- 
der any such hope illusive. Whether that colli- 
sion was produced in any degree by our own mis- 
takes, or whether the war itself was brought about 
by the manner in which Texas was annexed to 
the Union, are questions I do not propose to dis- 
cuss now; and if it were not too late, I would sub- 
mit whether the discussion could serve any other 
purpose but to exhibit divided councils to our ad- 
versary, and to inspire him with the hope of ob- 
taining more favorable terms of peace by protracting 
his resistance. No one can be less disposed than 
myself to abridge, in any degree, the legitimate 
boundaries of discussion. But I am not disposed 
to enter into such an investigation now. The 
urgent concern is to know, not how the war origi- 
nated, not who is responsible for it, but in what 
manner it can be brought to a speedy and honor- 
able termination; whether, as some suppose, we 
ought to retire from the field, or whether, as ap- 

fiears to me, the only hope of an accommodation 
ies in a firm and determined maintenance of our 
position. 

The probable consequences of an abandonment 
of the advantages we have gained may be better un- 
derstood by seeing what those advantages are. I 
speak in a military point of view. While address- 
ing the Senate in February last on an army bill 
then under consideration, I had occasion to state, 
that the whole of northern Mexico as far south as 
the mouth of the Rio Grande and the 26th parallel 
of latitude was virtually in our possession, com- 
prehending about two-thirds of the territory of that 
republic, and about one-tenth of its inhabitants. 
Our acquisitions have since been augmented by the 
reduction of Vera Cruz and the Castle of San Juan 



by repeating what I said at that time.* But I can- 
not forbear to say, that there is a moral in the con- 
test, the eflect of which is not likely to be lost on 
our.selvcs or others. At the call of their country 
our people liave literally rushed to arms. The 
cnuilation has been to be received into the service, 
not to be excused from it. Individuals from the 
plough, the counting-house, the law-office, and the 
workshop, have taken the field, braving inclement 
seasons and inhospitable climates without a mur- 
mur; and, though wholly unused to arms, with- 
standing the most destructive fire, and storming 
butteries at the [loint of the bayonet with the cool- 
ness, intrepidity, and spirit of veterans. I believe 
I may safely say, there has been no parallel to 
these achievements by undisciplined forces since 
the French revolution. I am not sure that his- 
tory can furnish a parallel. As to the regular 
army, we always expect it to be gallant and heroic, 
and we are never disappointed. The whole con- 
duct of the war in tiie field has exhibited the 
highest evidence of our military capacity. It con- 



*The reference alluded to is contained in the rollowing 
extract: 

" 1 will not detain the Senate by entering Into any detailed 
review ol' these events with a view to eiilbice the appeal 
contained in th« petition on the atlenlion. I hope, however, 
I may be indulged in saying, in jusliee to those who bore a 
part in them, tliat the first conquest of Mexico cannot, as it 
appears to nie, be compared with the second, either as totlie 
ob-itaeles overcome, or as to the relative strenjjth of the in- 
vaders. The triumphs of Cortez were achieved by policy 
and by superiority in discipline and in the implements of 
warfare. The use of fire-itrma, until then unknown to the 
inhabitants of Mexico, was sufficient in itself to make hia 
force, small as it was, irresistible. In the eyes of that sim- 
ple and superstitious people he seemed nrnied with super- 
human power. Other circumstances combined to facilitate 
his success. The native tribes, by whom the country was 
possessed, were distinct counnunities, not always acknowl- 
edgini; the same head, and often divided anions themselves 
by implacable hostility and resentments. Cortez, by his 
consummate prudence and art, turned these dissensions to 
his own account ; he lured the parties to them into his own 
service, and when he presented himself at the aates of the 
city of Mexico, he was at the head of four thousand of the 
most warlike of the natives, as auxiliaries to the band of 
Spaniards, with which he commenced his n;arch t'rnm Vera 
Cruz. Tlius his early successes were as much the triinnph 
of policy as of arms. General Scott, and the gallant band 
he led, had no such advantages. The whole population of 
the country, from Vera t'ruz to Mexico, was united .is one 
man against him, and animated by the fiercest animosity. 
He w:\.i opposed by military forces armed like his own, 
of^cn better disciplined, occupying positions chosen by them- 
selves, strong by nature, and fortified according to the 
strictest rules of art. These obstucles were overcome by 



his skill as a tactician, aided by a corps of otTiccrs unsur- 
de Ulua, the capture of Jalapa, Perote, and Puebia, passed for their knowledge of the art of attack and defence, 
the surrender of the city of Mexico, and the occu- \ •■">'' '>>' '•>« indomitable courage of their followers. With 

pation of the three States of Vera Cruz, Puebia, ''"ILl'l'fr^^J^-^V.ho''''" ''l""'' '''•''' "' *" ".'« 'I'fP"-'"' »"^ 

r , ,. . . , , .... ,' , ,^1 with less than SIX thousand ineti, alter a series of desperate 

and Mexico, with nearly two millions and a half of contests, he took posses-iim oi the city of Mexico, coniain- 

:80uls. It is true, our forces have not overrun every ing nearly two hundred ilidusand inhabitants, and defended 

.portion of the territory of tho.se States; but their •'V the remnant of an army of more than thirty thon.sanrt 

.iL ;„<•.„..,„„ u„.,„ I,, ..„ 1 ,1 .1 :i:.,_ . e „ 1 soldiers. I confess I know nothing in modern warfare which 

chief towns have been i educed, the military forces ^^^^^^^ ;„ brilliiu.cy the movemel.ts of the .\merican army 

which defended them captured or dispersed, their i from the Gulf to the city of Mcvico. I shall not attempt tc 

civil authorities superseded, their capital occupied, speak of them in the language ofciiiogium. They are niya 

and the whole machinery of government within the 'V ""•"";,f"^ '""''' eominent. Like the achiev-emen/s of 

, o. . • . 11 . r 1 • LI (Jeiieral I aylor and Ins brave men on the Kio Gia»<le, nt 

coBquered States virtually transferred to our hands. Monterey and Buena VisUi, the highest and most apFfopriata 

AH this has been achieved with an army at no one praise is contuincd in the simplest statement of f»cts." 



i 



firms an opinion I have always lield — that a soldier 
is formidable in ratio of the importance he pos- 
sesses in the order of the political system of which 
he is a part. It establishes anotlier position of 
vital importance to us: that, under the protection 
of our militia system, the country may, at the 
termination of every contest, lay aside the more 
massive and burdensome parts of its armor, and 
become prepared, with energies renewed by that 
very capacity, for succeeding scenes of danger. 

Mr. President, the political condition of Mexico 
has been gradually approaching a dissolution of 
ail responsible governm.''nt, and of the civil order, 
which constitutes her an independent state. This 
lamentable situation is not the fruit alone of our 
military successes. The factions, by which that 
country has been distracted, each in turn gaining 
and maintaining a temporary ascendency, and 
often by brute force, lie at the foundation of the 
social and political disorder which has reigned 
there for the last twenty years. To most of the 
abuses of the old colonial system of Spain, she has 
superadded the evils of an unstable and irrespons- 
ible government. The military bodies, which 
have been the instruments of those who have thus 
in succession gained a brief and precarious control 
over her affairs, though dispersed, still exist, ready 
to be re-united and to renew the anarchy which 
we have superseded, for the time being, by a mili- 
tary government; and this brings me to the first 
great objection to the proposition of withdrawing 
our armies from the field. 

I have already said that no policy can deserve 
our support which does not hold out the promise 
of a durable peace. Nothing seems to me more 
unlikely to secure so desirable a result, than an 
abandonment of Mexico by us at the present mo- 
ment without a treaty, leaving behind a strong 
feeling of animosity towards us, with party divis- 
ions as strongly marked, and political animosities 
as rancorous, perhaps, as they have been at any 
former period. Even when her capital had fallen, 
humbled and powerless as she was, party leaders, 
instead of consulting for the common good, were 
seen struggling with each other for the barren 
Bceptre of her authority. Our retirement as en- 
emies would, in all probability, be the signal for 
intestine conflicts as desperate and sanguinary as 
those in which they have been engaged with us — 
conflicts always the most disastrous for the great 
body of the Mexican people, for, on what side 
soever fortune turns, they are certain to be the 
victims. You know, sir, there are two great par- 
ties in Mexico, (I pass by the minor divisions) — 
the ♦' Federalistas" and " Centralistas." The 
former, as their name imports, are in favor of the 
federative system ; they are the true republican 
party. With us, in former times, the terms " Fed- 
eral" and *' Republican" designated difl^erent par- 
ties; in Mexico, they are both employed to desig- 
nate the friends of the federative system. The 
Centralists are in favor of a consolidated Govern- 
ment, republican or monarchical in form, and are 
composed of the army, the clergy, and I suppose 
a small portion of the population. I believe our 
only hope of obtaining a duiable peace lies in the 
firm establishment of the Federal party in power — 
tlw party represented by Herrera, Anaya, Pena y 
Peiia, Cumplido, and others. I understand Her- 
rera has been elected President of the Republic; 
and tiiis is certainly a favorable indication. But, 



unfortunately, I fear this parly would not succeed 
in maintaining itself, if Mexico were left to her- 
self at the present moment with an imbittered 
feeling of hostility towards us. The military 
chiefs, who controlled the army, and who might 
rally it again, for political uses, if we were to retire 
without a treaty, are for the most part enemies of 
the federative system, and conservators of the 
popular abuses, to which they owe their wealth 
and importance. Nothing could be more unfortu- 
nate for Mexico than the reestaljlishmcnt of these 
men in power. It would bring with it a hopeless 
perpetuation of the anarchy and oppression which 
nave given a character to their supremacy in past 
years — a supremacy without a prospect of ame- 
lioration in the condition of the Mexican people — 
a supremacy of which the chief variation has been 
an exchange of one military despot for another. 

Calamitous as the restoration of this parly to 
their former ascendency would be for Mexico, it 
would hardly be less so for us. Relying on mili- 
tary force for their support, their policy would be 
to continue the war as a pretext for maintaining 
the army in full strength, or, at least, not to termi- 
nate it till peace would ensure their own suprema- 
cy. It is believed that these considerations have 
been leading motives in the resistance they have 
opposed to us. It is true, the republican party has 
been equally hostile, so far as external indications 
show; but the fact is accounted for by their desire 
to see the war continued until the army and its 
leaders, the great enemies of the federative system, 
are overthrown. Undoubtedly the obstinate re- 
fusal of Mexico to make peace may be very prop- 
erly referred to the natural exasperation of every 
people whose soil is invaded; but there can be little 
doubt that it has been influenced, in no inconsider- 
able degree, by considerations growing outof party 
divisions,and the jealousy and animosities to which 
those divisions have given rise. My confidence in 
our ability to make an amicable arrangement with 
the federal party, if it were in undisputed posses- 
sion of the Government, arises from the belief that 
their motives are honest, that they have at heart 
the public welfare, and that they must see there i.s 
no hope for Mexico but in a solid peace with us. 
My utter distrust of the Centralists arises from the 
belief that their objects are selfish, and that, to ac- 
complish them, they would not hesitate to sacrifice 
the liberties of the people and the prosperity of the 
country. But whether I err in these views or not, 
I feel quite confident I do not err in believing that 
if our armies were to be withdrawn from Mexico, 
without a peace, the flames of civil discord would 
be rekindled in that unhappy country, and burn 
with redoubled violence. I should greatly fear 
that the military chiefs would succeedin reestab- 
lishing their ascendency, and that no probable 
limit could be assigned to the duration of the war. 
If I am right, our true policy is to stand firm, and, 
if possible, united, until wiser counsels shall pre- 
vail in Mexico, and a disposition shall be shown 
to come to an amicable arrangement with us on 
reasonable terms. 

The objection I have stated to the proposition of 
withdrawing our forces from Mexico, concerns 
only the relations which now exist, or may exist 
hereafter, between the two countries. If there 
were no other objection, the question might be 
decided upon considerations touching only their 
domestic interests and their mutual rights. 



1 



/ 



/But I come to the second objection — one perhaps 
/ o^raver import tlian the first, because it sup- 
poses the possibiUty, if not tlic probability, of an 
interference in her affairs by oilier countries, if 
we were to retire without a treaty and without 
commercial arrangements, which it would be in 
our power to enforce. The President alluded to 
tiie subject in his amiual message at the opening of 
Congress, and expressed an np|irchenaion of danger 
from that source. I participate in it. 1 shall as- 
sign the grounds on wliicli it rests; and I only 
regret that, in stating thctn with the minuteness 
necessary to make llieni fully understood, I .shall 
be compelled to draw much more largely than I 
desire on the patience of the Senate. 

Senators are doubtless aware that the right of 
intervention in the affairs of this continent was 
foriTially asserted in tlie French Chamber of De|)U- 
ties, in the year 1845, by M. Guizot, Minister of 
Foreign Afi'airs, as the organ of the Government 
of France. He re<rarded the great powers on this 
continent as divided into three groups, namely: 
Great Britain, the United Slates, and the Slates of 
Spanish origin; and he declared that it belonged 
to France " to protect, by the authority of her 
name, the independence of Slates, and the equilib- 
rium of the great political forces in America." To 
this declaration, I have thought it not out of place, 
in connection with the subject under discussion, to 
call the attention of the Senate; not for the pur- 
pose of undertaking the formal refutation, of 
which I think the whole doctrine of intervention, 
as it has been practically enforced in Europe, is 
clearly susceptible, but for the purpose of deny- 
ing it as founded upon any well established piin- 
ciples of international law, and, if it had such a 
foundation, of denying its applicability to the po- 
litical condition of this continent. To enter fully 
into the examination of this important .subject, 
would require more time than it would be proper 
for me to devote to it. I propose only to pass 
rapidly over a few of the principal considerations 
it suggests. 

The declaration of M. Guizot was the first pub- 
lic and official intimation, by a European govern- 
ment, of an intention to interfere with the political 
condition of the independent connnunities on the 
continent of America, and to influence by moral, 
if not by physical agencies, their relations to each 
other. And if it had been presented in any other 
form than thai of an abstract declaration, not ne- 
cessarily to be followed by any overt act, it would 
have behooved us to inquire, in the most formal 
manner, whether tliis asserted right of interposi- 
tion derived any justification from the usages of 
nations, or from the recognized principles of inter- 
national law; or whether it wa.s not an assump- 
tion wholly unsupported by authority, and an en- 
croachment on the independence of sovereign 
States, which it would have been their duly to 
themselves and the civilized v.-orld to resent as an 
injury a wrong. 

Am I in error in supposing this subject derives 
new importance' from our existing relations wiih 
Mexico, one of the states of Spanish origin, which 
M. Guizot grouped together as consliluting one of 
the great political forces of this continent, among 
which the " equilibrium" was to be maintained ? 
Sir, more than once, in tlie progress of the war, 
the governments of Europe have been invoked, by 
leading organs of public opinion abroad, to inter- 



pose between us and Mexico. Is it not, then, ap- 
propriale briefly to slate what this right of inter- 
vention is, as it has been asserted in Europe, what 
it has been in practice, and what it would be likely 
to become, if applied to the Slates of this conti- 
nent? 1 trust it will be so considered. 

The doctrine of intervention to maintain the bal- 
ance of power is essentially of modern origin. 
From the earliest ages, it is true, occasional com- 
binations have been formed by pa'riicular States for 
mutual protection against the aggressions of a |iow- 
erful neighbor. History is full of tliesc examples. 
Such a coopei'ation is dicialtd by the plainest 
principles of self-preservation, for the purjwse of 
guarding against the danger of being destroyed in 
detail; and it is founded upon such obvious max- 
ims of common sense, that it would have been re- 
markable if it had not been resorted to from the 
moment human society assumed a regular form of 
organization. These defensive alliances were de- 
ficient in the permanence and methodical arrange- 
ments which distinguish the modern system of 
intervention. Hume saw, or fancied he saw, in 
tliem the principle of the right of intervention to 
preserve the balance of power which is asserted at 
the present day. But it could only have been the 
principle which was developed ; they certainly 
never attained the maturity or the efficient force of 
a regular system. 

The modern doctrine of intcrvcntiori in the af- 
fairs of other States, which has sprung np within 
the last two centuries, is far more comprehensive 
in its scope. It has grown into a practical system 
of supervi.-sion on the part of the principal Euro- 
pean powers over their own relative forces and 
those of the other Slates of Europe; and though 
it may, in some instances, have been productive of 
beneficial effects in maintaining the public tran- 
quillity, it has as frequently been an instrument of 
the grossest injustice and tyranny. From the first 
extensive coalition of this nature, which was 
formed during the long series of wars terminated 
by the peace of Westphalia, in 1648, down to the 
interference of Great Britain, Prussia, Austria, and 
Fiance, in the contest between the Sultan and Me- 
hcmet All, in 1840, a period of nearly two centu- 
ries — an interference designed, in some degree, to 
prevent what was regarded as a dangerous protect- 
orate over the affairs of the Porte by Russia — the 
exercise'of the right has been jilaccd, theoretically, 
on the same high ground of regard for the tran- 
quillity of Europe and the independence of Slates. 
Practically, it has often been perverted to the worst 
purposes of aggrandizement and cupidity. 

If we look into the writers on international k\w, 
I think we shall find no sufficient ground for the 
right of intervention. Grotius, who wrote in the 
early part of the scveniee>nth century, denied its 
existence. Fenelon, who wrote about half a cen- 
tury later, denied it, except as a means of self-pre- 
servation, and then only when the danger was real 
and imminent. Vuttel, who wrote neariy a century 
afier Fenelon, and a century before our own times, 
regarded the States of Europe as forming a political 
system, and he restricted the right of entering into 
confederacies and alliances for the purpose of inter- 
vention in the affairs of each other, to cases in 
which such combinations were necessary to curb 
the ambition of any power which, from its superi- 
ority in physical strength, and its designs of op- 
pression or conquest, threatened to become Jangcr- 



ows to ifs neighbors. De ATnrtrns, who wrote half 
a century ago, acknowledges, witli Vatlel, tlic ex- 
istence of the right under c(^rtnin conditions, lliough 
he liardly admits it to be well settled as a rule of 
infernulional law; and lie limits its exercise to 
neighboring states, or states occupying the same 
quarter of the globe. But, according to the two 
last writers, who have, perhaps, gone as far as any 
other public jurists, of equal eminence, towards a 



two or more weaker states to protect themselves 
against the designs of an ambitiou.s and powerful 
neighbor. In its practical application, ii has more 
fre(juently resulted in a combination of powerful 
states to destroy iheir weaker neighbors for the 
augmentation of their own dominions or those of 
their allies. From a mere riglit to combine for 
self-preservation, they have made it in practice a 
ri«ht to divide, dismonil)er, and partition states at 



1 



the strenirth of a poweiful adversar 



-Imt under 



formal recognition of the right, it only justifies a 1 their pleasure — not for the purpose of diminishing 
union of inferior states within the same imniediate 
sphere of action, to p'-event an accumulation of 
power in the hands of a single sovereign, which 
would be too great for the common liberty. 

I am confident, Mr. President, that no one can 
rise from a review of the iiistory of modern Eu- 
rope, and from an examination of the writings of 
her public jurists, without being satisfied that the 
right of intervention, as recognized by civilized 
nations, is what I have stated it to be — a mere 
right, on the jiart of weaker states, to combine 
for the purpose of preventing the subversion of 
their independence, and the alienation of their ter- 
ritories, by a designing and powerful neighbor; a 
right to be exercised only in cases of urgent and 
immediate danger. It is simply a right of self- 
preservation, undefined, undefinable, having no set- 
tled or permanent foundation in public law, to be 
asserted only in extreme necessity, and when arbi- 
trarily applied to practice, a most fruitful source of 
abuse, injustice, and oppression. One clear and 
certain limitation it happily possesses — a limitation 
which, amid all its encroachments upon the inde- 
pendence of sovereign Slates, has never until our 
day been overpassed. By universal consent, by 
the unvarying testimony of abuse itself, it is not 
to be exercised beyond the immediate sphere of 
the nations concerned. It pertains rigidly and ex- 
clusively to states within the same circle of politi- 
cal action. It is only by neighbors, for the pro- 
tection of neighbors against neighbors, that it can, 
even upon the broadest principles, be rightfully 
employed. When it traverses oceans, and looks 
to ttie regulation of the political concerns of other 
continents, it becomes a gigantic assumption, 
which, for the independence of nations, for the 
interests of humanity, for the tranquillity of the 
Old World and the New, should be significantly 
repelled. 

Mr. President, a review of the history of Eu- 
rope during the last two centuries will bring with 
it another conviction in respect to the right of in- 
tervention — that no reliance can be placed on its 
restriction in practice to the objects to which it is 
limited by every public jurist who admits its ex- 
istence at all; and that nothing could be so dis- 
couraging to the friends of free government as an 
extension of the system to this continent, if the 
power existed to introduce it here. Though the 
combinations it is claimed to authorize m;iy, in 
some instances, have protected the coalescing par- 
ties from the danger of being overrun by conquer- 
ing armies, the cases are perhaps as numerous, in 
which their interposition has been lent to lireak 



the pretence of creating a system of balances, which 
is artificial in its structure, and, in some degree, 
incongruous in its elements, and which a single 
political convulsion may overturn and destroy. Do 
we need examples of the abuse of the j)ower, I 
will not call it a right.' They will be found in the 
dismemhermentofSaxony ,thcannexation of the re- 
publicof Genoa to the kingdom of Sardinia, and the 
absorption of Venice by Austria. There is another 
and a more aggravated case of abuse to which re- 
cent events have given new prominence. In 1772, 
Russia, Prussia, and .Austria, under the pretence that 
the disturbed condition of Poland was dangerous to 
their own tranquillity, seized upon about one-third 
of her territories, and divided it among themselves. 
In 1793, notwithstanding her dimini.^-hed propor- 
tions, she had become more dangerous, and they 
seized half of what they had left to her by the first 
partition. Sir, she continued to grow dangerous 
as she grew weak ; and in two years after the sec- 
ond partition, they stripped her of all that remained, 
fu 1815, the five great Powers, at the Congress of 
Vienna, from motives of policy, and not from a 
returning sense oi" justice, organized the city of 
Cracow and a portion of the surrounding territory, 
with a population of about one hundred thousand 
souls, into a republic, under the protection of Aus- 
tria, Russia, and Prussia, v.'ith a guarantee of its 
independence in perpetuity. Russia pledged her- 
self, at the same time, to maintain her share of the 
spoil, as the kingdom of Poland in name and form, 
with a constitutional government. She kept her 
pledge seventeen years, and then virtually incor- 
porated it as an integral part into the Russian em- 
pire. The little republic of Cracow was all that 
remained as a monument of the dismembered king- 
dom. A year ago, it was obliterated as an inde- 
pendent state by the three great powers of eastern 
and northern Europe, in violation of their solemn 
guarantee, and assigned to Austria. The name of 
Polcinci, the fountain of so many noble and ani- 
mating recollections, is no longer to be found on 
the map of Europe. The three quarters of a cen- 
tury which, intervened from the inception to the 
consummation of this transaction are not sufficient 
to conceal or even to obscure its true character. 
The very magnitude of the space over which it is 
spread only serves to bring it out in bolder and 
darker relief from the pages of history. 

If the United States, in the progress of these 
usurpations, has not remonstrated against them, 
and contributed by her interposition to maintain 
the integrity of the states thus disorganized and 
down the independence of states, and to throw | dismembered in violation of every rule "of right, 
whole communities of men into the arms of govern- j and every suggestion of justice and humanity, it 
ments to which their feelings and principles were is because we have been faithful, against all move- 
alike averse. The right, as has been seen — (and | ments of sympathy, against the very instincts of 
it cannot be too often repeated) — with the utmost j nature, to the principle of abstaining from all inter- 
Lit itude claimed for it by any public jurist, goes no i ference with the movements of European powers, 
further than to authorize a league on the part of' which relate exclusively to the condition of the 



r 



6 



- quarter of the globe to which they belong. But 
when it is proposed or thrciiteiicd to extend to this 
continent and to ourselves a similar system of bal- 
ances, with all its danger of abuse and usurjiation, 
I hold it to be onr duty to inquire on what grounds 
it rests, that we may be prepared to resist all prac- 
tical application of it to the independent states in 
this hemisphere. 

Mr. President, the declaration of M. Guizot 
could hardly have been made without the previous 
approbation of the goverrmient, of which he was 
the organ. Tiie same sovereign occupies the throne 
of France — the same minister stands before it as 
the exponent of his opinions. Is the declaration 
to be regarded as a mere idle annunciation in words 
of a design never intended to be carried into prac- 
tice? Let me answer the question by the briefest 
possible reference to circumstances. France was 
the coadjutor oi' England in the attempt to induce 
Texas to decline annexation to the Union. Failing 
in this, she attempted to accomplish the same ob- 
ject indirectly, by persuading Mexico to recognize 
the independence of Texas, on condition that the 
latter should remain an independent state. These 
terms were offered to Texas, and rejected. In the 
year 1844, I believe less than twelve months before 
M. Guizot's declaration was made, (and the coin- 
cidence in point of time is remarkaljle,) a book on 
Oregon and California was published in Paris by 
order of the King of France, under the auspices of 
Marshal Soult, President of the Council, and M. 
Guizot, Minister of Foreign AfTairs, and written 
by M. de Mofras, who was attached to the French 
legation in Mexico. The first part of the work is 
devoted to Mexico, and certainly contains some 
remarkable passages. He speaks of the establish- 
ment of a European monarchy as a project which 
had been suggested as the only owi calculated to 
put an end to the divisions and annihilate the fac- 
tions which desolated that Ijeautiful country.* He 
says the Catholic religion and family relations, 
with the ancient possessors of the country, would 
be the first conditions required of the princes, who 
should be called to reconstruct there a monarchical 
government. He then adds: 

"The iiifantns of S|i:iiM, the French princes, and the 
archiiuljes' of' Aii>tii:i, fulfil thrsc condition.*, luid wt; may 
atTirni that, fmni vvliichevcr ([uartcr a competitor slioiihl 
present hihiselt, he would l)e ununtinoujiy welcuincd by tlie 
Mexican people. 

" What, then, are the interests of France in these ques- 
tions ? 



* The day after tliis speech was delivered, Mr. D. received 
from a friend in New Yorlc, who rnuld have had no knowl- 
ed;;i: of liis intention to speak, niiieli less of the topics he 
desisned to discuss, a translation iVoni a speech delivered to 
tlve Cortes of tSpain on the 1st of Diceniber, 1847, by Seiior 
Olo7.oj;a, a man of distinction, and supposed to he the 
same individual who was a few year.s sinec fir.-t minister of 
the Crown. By this sp^'ceh it appears that as reeently as 
1846, a year after M. Guizot's declaration was made, and 
two years after M. de Mofras's book was published, Inr^e 
sums were expended by Spain for the purpose of estaiilisli- 
inji a monarehy in Mexico, and of placing a Spanish prince 
on the throne. The close eonnection uftlie governments of 
France and Spafn by the marriage of the Duke of Montpen- 
sier, the son of Lcmis Philippe, to the sister of Queen Isa- 
bella, gives additional imporiaiice-to these developments: 

" No one, either on this floor or elsewhere, ran deny that 
the project has been enteitaiind of establishiny a mon.inhy 
in Mexico, and to plaee a .Sp:ini-li priiici' on the Ihroiie. 
This project, conceived in the lime of the Conde Aramla, 
would have saved our colojiies from the sad late they have 
suffrred ; hut l>rou.'lit forward on this ocea-ioti, it was the 
most absurd idea that could have bc^en conceived. IJiit we 
have not only todeplon; havin;; I'xeited political airimosili>:s 
a nd the conseciuenees this has produced in that country ; we 



" The estidilishment in Mexico of a monarchy of any de- 
scription whatever, restin-; upon a solid basis, should be the 
lirst object of our policy; for we know that the instubility 
attached to the actual form of its government, brini;s with it 
disadvanta^jes for our commerce, and inconvenieneea for 
our people." 

He adds, that if Mexico is to preseiT^e her re- 
publican form of government, her incorporation 
nito the Union of the North would seem more 
favorable to France than her existing condition, on 
account of the development of commerce and al! 
the guarantees of liberty, security, and justice, 
which his compatriots would enjoy; and that Eng- 
land would lose, under such an order of things, 
what France would gain. Thus, though the dis- 
memberment and absorption of Mexico by the Uni- 
ted States, are regarded by M. de Mofras as prefer- 
able to the commercial monopoly and the " species 
of political sovereignty," as he denominates it, 
which Englitnd has exercised in that coimtry, the 
first object of France, according to him, should be a 
reconstruction of monarchy in Mexico, with a for- 
eign prince on the throne, and thisprince from some 
branch of the Bourbon family. The opinions con- 
tained in this book are not put forth as the mere 
speculations of a private person. They are the 
opinions of an agent of the government: the pub- 
lication is made by order of the king, and under 
the auspices of his two chief ministers, and so 
stated in the title page. I do not mean to hold the 
government of France responsible for all the opin- 
ions contained in that work ; but, can we believe 
that those I have quoted, concerning as they do so 
grave a subject as the international relations of 
France with Mexico, and of Mexico with the 
United States, would have been put forth without 
modification under such high official sanctions, if 
they had been viewed with positive disfavor.' It 
appears to me, that we are constrained to view 
them, like the declaration of M. Guizot, though 
certainly to a very inferior extent, as possessing 
an official character, which we are not at liberty 
wholly to disregard, when we consider the one in 
connection with the other. 

And now, sir, 1 ask, do not these opinions and 
declarations, especially when we look to the open 
and direct interference of Great Britain and France, 
by force of arms, in the domestic affairs of some 
of tlie South American republics within the last 
two years, furnish a just ground of apprehension, 
if we should retire from Mexico without a treaty 
and as enemies, that it might become a theatre for 



have also to lann^nt the money lost and tlirown away upon 
Mexican soil. And in order that the Cortes may not believe 
I am about to make accusations of so grave a character with- 
out possessing proofs to corroborate tlicwi, 1 now hold in my 
hand a statement of the sums expended and drawn from (he 
treasury in Havana in the year 18^6, signed by the Senor 
Navairo as auditor, and Musica as treasurer. In this state- 
ment there is an item which says: ' Paid bills of exchange 
remitted by the minister plenipotentiary ol her Majesty id 
Mexico foi" matters bi'longing to the service, $100,000.' But 
much greatir than this was the authority our minister in 
Mexico po-sessed for disposinjj of the public funds. I do not 
know wiiether he has made use of it. I do not t-ven know 
his name. I suppose ho. will employ them with scrupu- 
Imis honesty; but is the Spanish iieiple so bounlifully sup- 
plied with millions that they can atiord to srnil ilnin to the 
New World, for the purpose of sustainiiiL' political intrii'iies 
in tliatdistant region i" How many meritorious military men, 
who have shed their blood for the good of their country, and 
whose means of support have been cut down to the lowest 
possible point, might have been aided by these large sums? 
How much misery miiiht have been alleviated by the money 
which has been thrown away in this maniieri' And where 
do tlK^y find authority for squaadcring imlUuns to laster for- 
eign intriguus ?" 



the exercise of influences of a most iinfricndly 
character to us? Witii the aid of the monarchical 
party in Mexico, would there not be dariger that 
the avowed design of establishing a throne, might 
be realized ? The chances of open interposition 
are unquestional)ly diminished by the results of 
the war; but I am constrained to believe the 
chances of secret interference arc increased by the 
avidity imputed to us for territorial extension. 
Ought not this danger to influence, to some ex- 
tent, our own conduct, at least so far as to dis- 
suade us from abandoning, until a l)etter pros- 
pect of a durable peace shall exist, the advantage 
we have gained as belligerents? We know a 
great majority of the Mexican people are radically 
averse to any other than a republican form of gov- 
ernment; but we know, also, the proneness of a 
peo|ile among whom anarchy reigns triumphant, 
to seek any refuge which promises the restoration 
of tranquillity and social order. 

Mr. President, any attempt by a European power 
to inter|iose in the affairs of Mexico, either to estab- 
lish a monarchy, or to maintain, in the language of 
M.Guizot, " the equilibrium of the great political 
forces in America, would be the signal for a war 
far more important in its consequences, and inscru- 
table in its issues, tiian this. We could not sub- 
mit to such interposition if we would. The public 
opinion of the country would compel us to resist 
it. We are committed by the most formal decla- 
rations, first made by President Monroe in 1823, 
and repeated by the present Chief Magistrate of 
the Union. We have protested, in the mostsolemn 
manner, against any further colonization by Euro- 
pean powers on this continent. We have protested 
against any interference in the political concerns of 
the independent states in this hemisphere. A pro- 
test, it is true, does not imply that the ground it 
assumes is to be maintained at ail hazards, and if 
necessary, by force of arms. Great Britain pro- 
tested against the interference of France in the 
affairs of Spain in 1823; she has more recently 
protested against the al)sorption of Cracow by 
Austria as a violation of the political order of 
Europe, settled at Vienna by the allied sovereigns, 
and against the Montpensier marriage as a viola- 
tion of the treaty of Utrecht; but I do not remem- 
ber that in either case she did anything more than 
to proclaim to the world her dissent from the acts 
against which she entered her protest. It lias 
always seemed to me to be unwise in a government 
to put forth manifestoes without being prepared to 
maintain them by acts, or to make declarations of 
abstract principle until the occasion has arrived for 
enforcing them. The declarations of a President 
having no power to make war without a vote of 
Congress, or even to employ the military force of 
the country except to defend our own territory, is 
very different from the protest of a sovereign hold- 
ing the issues of peace and war in his own hands. 
But tlie former may not be lesseffectual when they 
are sustained, as I believe those of Presidents 
Monroe and Polk are, in respect to European in- 
terference on the American continent, by an undi- 
vided public opinion, even though they may not 
have nei'eivcd a formal response from Congress. I 
hold, therefore, if any su-eh interposition as that 
to which I have referred should take place, resist- 
ance on our part would inevitably follow, and we 
should become involved in controversies, of which 
no nvda could foresee the end. 



■e to 1 



Before I quit this part of the subject, I desire 
advert to some circumstances recently made public, 
and, if true, indicating significantly the extent to 
which Great Britain is disposed to carry her other 
encroachments on this continent, as in every other 
quarter of the globe. On the coast of Honduras, in 
Central America, commonly called the Musquito 
coast, there is a tribe of Indians bearing the same 
name, numbering but a few hundred individuals, 
and inhabiting some miserable villages in the 
neighborhood of Cape Gracias a Dios, near the 
fifteenth parallel of north latitude. Several hun- 
dred miles south is the river San Juan, running 
from Lake Nicaragua to the Caribbean sea, a ' 
space of about two degrees of longitude, with the 
town of Nicaragua at its mouth, and a castle or 
fort about midway between the town and the lake. 
The lake is only fifteen leagues from the Pacific, 
and constitutes, with the river San Juan, one of 
the proposed lines for a ship canal across the 
isthmus. Great Britain has recently laid claim to 
the river San Juan and the town of Nicaragua, if 
she has not actually taken possession of the latter. 
I have seen a conmiunicalion from the British 
consul-general at Guatemala, asserting the inde- 
pendence of the Mosqnitos as a nation. 1 have 
al.so seen a communication from the British con- 
sul at Bluefield, on the Mosquito shore, asserting 
that " the Mosquito flag and nation are under the 
special protection of the crown of Great Britain," 
and that " the limits which the British Govern- 
ment is determined to maintain as the right of the 
King of the Mosquitos" "comprehend the San 
Juan river." By Arrowsmith's London Atlas, 
published in 1840, the Mosquito territory covered 
about 40,000 square miles, nearly as large an area 
as that of the State of New York; but it did not 
extend below the twelfth parallel of latitude, while 
the river San Juan is on the eleventh. I have seen 
the protest of the State of Nicaragua against the 
occupation of the town of Nicaragua on the river 
San Juan, which, as the protest declares, has been 
from time immemorial in her quiet ^nd peaceable 
possession. The state of San Salvador, one of 
the Central American republics, also unites in • 
the protest, and declares her determination, if the 
outrage shall be carried into effect, to exert her 
whole power until the usurper "shall be driven 
from the limits of Central America." 

I understand, for I speak only from information, 
that Great Britain has for some time claimed to 
have had the Mosquitos, a mere naked tribe of In- 
dians of a few hundred persons, under her protec- 
tion.* Through her influence they appointed a 
king, who was taken to Belize, a British station on 
the bay of Yucatan, and there crowned. It is said, 
also, that on the decease of the king, he was 
found to have bequeathed his domhiions to her 
Britannic Majesty. It appears to be certain that 
she has, under this pretence of protection, extend- 
ed her dominion over an immense surface in Cen- 



- Extract of a letter from the Supreme Government of the State 
of Nirara^ua to the Sujircme Government of tile State of 
San Snlcit<li,r. 

" A tribe with no recognized form of governnieiit, with- 
out civilization, anil nntirely nbandoncd to sava<>t: life, is 
suddenly uiiide use of liy enliiilitened Eiiglaiid for the pur- 
pose of plantiuK one of liiT fi'it in)on the Atlantic coat^t of 
this i^tiite; or nilhcr, Inr the purpo.-eof taking possession of 
the port for connnunicaiion lictwcen Europe, .Vnioriea, and 
Asia, and other iiMpiirtiint i oinitrics at the point where the 
gianil inlcroccanic canal is most practicable." 



8 



tral America; that s'le has at least one vessel of 
war, the Sun, commanded by an officer hearing an 
English name, " CommandcrTroUer, of tlie Mos- 
quito navy," as he is styled in a letter written by 
the British consul at Bluefield, and that she is still 
further extending herself, against the remonstrance 
of the Central American States. But these states, 
besides being physically weak, are distracted by 
internal feuds; and if the proceedings complained 
of be not the unauthorized acts of British agents, 
which Great Britain will disavow, it is hardly to 
be expected that a usurpation, so unjustifiably con- 
summated, will be abandoned on an appeal to the 
justice of the wrong-doer. Whether our govern- 
ment should remain quiescent under this encroach- 
ment upon near and defenceless neighbors, is a 
question worthy of consideration. Under any 
circumstances, it seems to me to afford little assu- 
rance of non-interference with the affairs of Mexi- 
co, if our forces were to be withdrawn without a 
treaty. 

There is another consideration which ought not 
to be overlooked. In July last, Lord George Ben- 
tinck made a motion for an address to her Britan- 
nic Majesty, praying her to take such measures as 
she might deem proper to secure the payment of 
the Spanish government bonds held by British sub- 
jects. Those bonds amount to about three hun- 
dred and eighty millions of dollars, and on about 
three hundred and forty millions no interest what- 
ever has been paid; and including this debt nearly 
seven hundred and thirty millions of dollars are 
due to British subjects by foreign governments — a 
sum equal to about one-fifth of her national debt. 
He contended, that " by the law of nations, from 
time immemorial, it has been held that the recov- 
ery of just debts is a lawful cause of war, if the 
country from which payment is du° refuses to 
listen to the claims of the country to whom money 
is owing." He quoted authorities to show that 
the payment of the debt, or the interest on it, 
might be enforced without having recourse to 
arms, though asserting the right to resort to force 
to compel it. 'He referred to the rich colonies of 
Spain, and especially Cuba, to show that there 
was wealth enough in its annual produce and rev- 
enue " to pay the whole debt due by Spain to 
British bond-holders." He referred to the naval 
foi-ce which Spain possessed to show that there 
would not be '-any very effective resis:ance," 
and that " the most timid minister" need not fear 
it. Having, in the course of his remarks, called 
the attention of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to 
the subject. Lord Palmerston, in responding to his 
call, entered into an extended statenient in respect 
to the foreign debt due to British subjects. He 
drew a distinction between transactions by one 
government with another, by British subjects with 
a foreign government, by British sulijecls with the 
subjects ofanother government, and between debts 
and acts of injustice and oppression. This dis- 
tinction, however, he treated as matter of expedi- 
ency and established practice. He assented to the 
doctrine laid down by the noble lord who made 
the motion for an .-iddrcss, and he said, if it were 
the wi.^e policy of England to lay down a rule that 
she would crtfjrce oljligations of this character 
with the same rigor as those of a different charac- 
ter, she would have a full and fair right, according 
to the laws of nations, to do so. And he conclud- 
ed by saying that England had not refrained from 



liking the steps urged by his noble friend, because 
she was " afraid of these stales, or all of ihem put 
together;" that it was not to be supposed the Brit- 
ish Parliament, or the British nation, would long 
remain patient under the wrong, and that they had 
am|>lc power and means to obtain justice. 

I pass over the doctrines put forth in the speech 
of Lord George Bentinck, and sanctioned by Lord 
Palmerston, though I believe it not perfectly clear 
that they can be maintained to the full extent, by 
an appeal to (jny well established principles of in- 
ternational law. You know, sir, that we have 
sometimes found British statesmen, even those 
holding places nearest to the tlirone, at fault, both 
in respect to matters of principle and matters of 
fact, though it is certainly but justice to concede 
to them the possession of more enlarged views of 
policy, combined with greater practical talent and 
tact, than is often to be found in the councils of 
European sovereigns. I pass over also an offen- 
sive allusion to the failure of two or three of the 
Slates of this Union to pay their debts, " a.s a 
stain upon the national character," (I use his own 
language,) when it is well known that the suspen- 
sion of payment was, temporary, and fi'om over- 
ruling necessity; that in most instances resump- 
tion has taken place; and that, in all, the most 
earnest efforts have been made to resume the dis- 
charge of their obligations. This imputation was 
cast upon us at the moment when our people, with 
one heart, were sending abroad their agricultural 
surplus to feed the famished population of Ire- 
land, not merely in the way of commercial ex- 
change, but in the form of donations, in ship-loads, 
public and private. And so far as the commercial 
portion is concerned, I believe our merchants have 
for months been draining our banks of specie, to 
send abroad to meet their own pecuniary obliga- 
tions, while for a time at least they were unable to 
draw on their debtors in England for the proceeds of 
the breadstuffs by which her subjects had been fed. 
But I pass by all this, and come to the important 
fact that Mexico was among the indebted foreign 
States enumerated in a report, on which the mo- 
tion of Lord George Bentinck was founded. What 
is the extent of her indebtedness I do not know, 
but I understand about seventy millions of dollars 
— and I believe it was but recently that the j^ublic 
domain in California was mortgaged to the credit- 
ors for a portion of this amount, though the lien 
is now said to be discharged. 

I appeal to honorable Senators to say, with 
these facts before them — with this public and offi- 
cial assertion of a principle, which, according to 
Lord Palnterston, the British government has only 
abstained from practically enforcing through mere 
considerations of policy — whether, if our forces 
were withdrawn from Mexico, and that country 
should become a ytrey to the anarchy and confusion 
which has reigned there so long, and which, if 
renesved, would iri all probability become univer- 
sal and hopeless — whether, I say, there would not 
be a temptation too strong to be resisted to reduce 
the principle tlius proclaimed to practice.' whether 
some portion of the Mexican territory might not 
be occupied as a guarantee for the payment of the 
debt due to British subjects, and thus another prin- 
ciple be violated, whicli we are committed to 
maintain? I do not mean to say that this consid- 
eration, if it stood alone, should absolutely con- 
trol our conduct. But as auxiliary to the graver 



9 



considerations to wliicli I liave referred, it appears 
to me that it may properly be allowed some weight 
— enough, sir, pcrlinps, to turn the scale, if it were 
already balanced — though, 1 tiiink, there is suffi- 
cient without it to incline us decisively to the side 
of continued occupation. 

Besides, British subjects have other extensive 
pecuniary interests in Mexico: they have large 
commercial establishments and lieavy investments 
of capital in the mining districts. If the political 
affairs of that country sliould fall into inextricable 
confusion, it is not to bo supposed that these great 
interests will be abandoned by Great Britain; and 
yet it is extremely dillicult to sec by what interpo- 
sition on her part they could be secured without 
the danger of collision between her and us. 

Mr. President, in what I have said in respect to 
the danger of foreign interposition, I have not re- 
lied upon the ephemeral opinions of the day, or on 
opinions expressed in public journals abroad, how- 
ever intimately those journals may be supposed to 
be connected with governments, as the organs of 
the views which it is deemed advisable to throw 
out, from time to time, for the public considera- 
tion or guidance. I have resorted to no irrespon- 
sible sources. I have presented opinions and dec- 
larations proclaimed with more or less of official 
sanction, and for the most part, with the highest — 
I mean the declarations of ministers, speaking for 
their governments to the popular body, and as the 
responsible representatives of sovereigns, holding 
in their own hands the authority to enforce, or 
attempt to enforce, what they proclaim. How far 
these declarations, taken in connection with the 
acts referred to, should influence our conduct, is a 
question on which we may not all agree. But it 
appears to me that it would be a great error in 
statesmanship to treat them as wholly unworthy 
of our consideration. Jealousy of our increasing 
power, commercial rivalry, political interests, all 
combine to give them importance. It is the prov- 
ince of a wise forecast to provide, as far as possible, 
that these adverse influences shall find no theatre 
for their exercise. To abandon Mexico would, it 
seems to me, throw wide open all the avenues for 
their admittance — one power for commercial mo- 
nopoly, and the other for political control — and 
perha|is impose on us the difficult and dangerou.'^ 
task of removing evils which a proper vigilance 
might have prevented. 

ft may be, Mr. President, that we shall have an 
early peace. I sincerely hope so. In this case, 
we must willulrav/ from Mexico; and it may per- 
haps be said that the dangers I have referred to as 
likely to result from our absence at the present 
moment may possibly be realized. These dangers, 
whatever they may be, we must incur whenever 
she shall tender us a peace, which we ought to 
accept. But there is a wide dilVerence between 
retiring as belligerents and enemies without a 
treaty, and as friends under an amicable ar- 
rangement, with solemn obligations on both sides \ 
to keep the peace. In the former case, probably : 
one of the first acts of ?vIexico would be to re- 
assemlde her army, anil her government might 
fall under the control of her military leaders. In 
the latter, amicable relations being restored, and 
military forces being unnecessary, at least to act 
against us, the peace party would have better 
hopes of maintaining themselves, of preventing the 
army, which is now regarded as responsible for the 



national disasters, from gaining the ascendency, 
and also of excluding influences from abroad, 
which would be hostile to her interests and fatal 
to the common tranquillity of both countries. 

In the references I have made to France and 
Great Britain, I have been actuated by no feeling 
of unkindness or hostility to either. Rapid" and 
wide-spread as lias been the progress of the latter, 
we have never sought to interfere with it. She 
holds one-third of the North American continent. 
She has established her dominion in the Bermu- 
das, the West Indies, and in Guiana, on the South 
American continent. She holds Belize, on the bay 
of Yucatan, in North America, with a district of 
about fourteen thousand square miles, if we may 
trust her own geographical delineations. We see 
her in the occupation of territories in every quar- 
ter of the globe, vastly, inordinately extended, 
and still ever extending herself. It is not easy 
to keep pace with her encroachments. A few 
years ago the Indus was the western boundary of 
her Indian empire. She has passed it. She has 
overrun Afighanistan and Beeloochistan, though 
I believe she has temporarily withdrawn from the 
former. She stands at the gates of Persia. She 
has discussed the policy of^ passing Persia, and 
making the Tigris her western boundary in Asia. 
One stride more would place her upon the shores 
of the Mediterranean; and her armies would no 
longer find their way to India' by the circumnavi- 
gation of Africa. Indeed, she has now, for all 
government purposes of communication, except 
the transportation of troops and munitions of war, 
a direct intercourse with the east. Her steamers 
of the largest class run from England to Alexan- 
dria; from Alexandria there is a water communi- 
cation with Cairo — some sixty miles; from Cairo 
it is but eight hours overland to Suez, at the head 
of the Red Sea; from Suez her steamers of the 
largest class run to Aden, a military station of hers 
at the mouth of the Red Sea, from Aden to Cey- 
lon, and from Ceylon to China. She is not merely 
conquering her way back from Hisdoostan. She 
has- raised her standard beyond it. She has en- 
tered the confines of the Celestial Empire. She has 
gained a permanent foothold within it; and who 
that knows her, can Ijelieve that pretexts will long 
be wanting to extend herdominion there? Though 
it is for commerce mainly that she is thus adding 
to the number and extent of her dependencies, it 
is not for commerce alone. The love of power and 
extended empire is one of the efficient principles of 
her gigantic efforts and movements. No island, 
however remote, no rock, however barren, on 
which the- cross of St. George has once been un- 
furled, is ever willingly relinquished, no matter 
how expensive or inconvenient it may be to main- 
tain it. She may be said literally to encircle the 
globe by an unbroken chain of dfpeiidencies. Nor 
is it by peaceful means that she is thus extending 
herself. She propagates commerce, as Moham- 
medanism propagated religion, by fire and sword. 
If .she negotiates, it is with fleets and armies at the 
side of her ambassadors, in order to use the language 
of her diplomacy, " to give force l:o their repre- 
sentations." She is essentially and eminently a 
military power, unequalled on the sea and unsur- 
passed on the land. Happily, the civilization, 
which distinguishes her at home, goes wiili her 
and obliterates some of the bloody traces of her 
march to unlimited empire. 



•^ / 



10 



,' Much less has any unlciml fceliii"; dictated my 
--TcfertMicc to Fmnee. Our relations with her have 
usually liocii (if the innst friciuily character. From 
the foundation of our Government there has exist- 
ed, on our side, a strong feeling of syinpathy in 
litr prosperities and lier misfortunes, which no tem- 
porary interru[)tion of our friendship has been ahle 
to eradicate. There is reason for this feeling: it 
would not have been creditable to us as a people if 
it had proved a transient sentinient. She stood 
forth at a critical period in our contest for inde- 
pendence, and rendered us the most essential ser- 
vice by her cooperation and aid. The swords of 
AVashington and Lafayette were unsheathed on 
the same battle-fields. Our waters and our plains 
have been crimsoned with tiie generous blood of 
France. The names of Rochambeau, De Grasse, 
and D'Estaingare identified with our struggles for 
freedom. They have become, in some degree, 
American, and we give them to our children as 
names to be remembered for the gallant deeds of 
those who bore them. It is tiot surprising, under 
such circumstances, that in the survey of the 
European system, we should have been accustomed 
to regard France as the power most likely, in the 
progress of events, to become the rival of England 
on the ocean as she has been on the land : and with 
a laree portion of our people, if the wish has not 
been "parent," it has, at least, been companion 
"to the thought." For this reason, the declara- 
tion of M. Guizot was considered, independently 
of all views of right, as peculiarly ungracious, and 
as a demonstration of feeling totally inconsistent 
with the ancient friendship by which the two 
countries have been united. I have never believed 
it to be in accordance with the sentiments of the 
French people. And so strong has been my reli- 
ance on their right judgment and feeling, that I 
confess I have thought it not unlikely that an inter- 
position in our affairs, so completely at variance 
with aniicalile relations, which ought to be held 
sacred, might be arrested by a more decisive inter- 
position at home against its authors. 

I rcjicat, I have spoken in no spiritof unkindness 
either towards Great Britain or France. I desire 
nothing but friendship with them — close, cordial, 
constant, mutually beneficial friendship. 1 speak 
of them historically, as tiiey exist and exhibit 
themselves to the eyes of the civilized world. 

Thus far, I have considered the probable conse- 
quences of retiring from Mexico, as they are likely 
to affect our political relations with her, and pos- 
sibly with other States. I now turn, for a single 
moment only, to a different class of considera- 
tions — I mean considerations arising out of our 
claims to indemnity for injuries. Although the 
war was not cotvimenced to secure it, this is one 
of the avowed objects for which it has been pros- 
ecuted. Shall we. abandon the position we have 
taken, and leave this object unaccomplished? Shall 
we not rather retain what we have acquired, until 
our just claims -are satisfied.' To do otherwise 
would be to have incurred an enormous e.xpendi- 
ture of treasure and blood to no purpose^ — to have 
prosecuted the war till we had the means of in- 
demnifying ourselves in our own hands, and then 
voluntarily to relinquish them. Such a course 
seems to me utterly irreconcilable either with jus- 
tice to ourselves or with sound policy. If I am 
not mistaken in the views I have expressed, it 
would be an abandonment of indemnity without 



getting rid of the war, on which we must now rely 
lo procure it. These considerations do not apply 
to the policy suggested by the honorable Senator 
from South Carolina. FIc proposes to take indem- 
nity into our own hands by occupying a portion of 
northern or central Mexico, and holding it without 
a treaty. My remarks are only applicable to the 
policy of withdrawing from Mexico altogether, 
and leaving the adjustment of differences to future 
negotiations. 

Having thus declared myself in favor of the oc- 
cupation of Mexico until she shall con.sent to make 
peace, I deem it proper to say, in connection with 
this subject, that I have been uniformly opposed, 
and that I am still opposed, to all schemes of con- 
quest for the acquisition of territr)ry. In this re- 
spect, I concur in what the Senator from South 
Carolina has said, and for nearly the same reasons. 
I arn opposed to all such schemes, because they 
would be inconsistent with the avowed objects of 
the war ; because they would be incompatible with 
justice and sound (lolicy; and because, if success- 
ful, they would be utterly subversive of the funda- 
mental principle of our political system, resting as 
it does on a voluntary association of free and inde- 
pendent States. I have been uniformly in favor 
of the most energetic measures in the prosecution 
of the war, because I believed them most likely to 
bring it to a close. In carrying our arms to the 
enemy's capital and occujiying his territory, I can 
see nothing inconsistent with the principles of jus- 
tice or the usages of civilized Slates. In the pros- 
ecution of a war undertaken to procure a redress 
of injuries, the territories or property of an enemy 
may he seized for the express purpose of conijiel- 
ling him to do justice. More may be taken than 
would constitute a fair indemnity for actual inju- 
ries, provided it be done with the intention of re- 
storing the surplus when he shall consent to make 
peace on reasonable terms. It is in this spirit, and 
with this intention, that my cooperation has been 
given to the vigorous prosecution of the war. We 
have a right to jnsist on a fair boundary; we may 
exact indemnity for injuries ; we may demand in- 
demnification for the expenses of the war, if we 
please. But here all right ceases; and if, when 
this is conceiled, we have more on our hands, we 
are bound, on every principle of law and good con- 
science, to make restitution. It is admitted on all 
hands that Mexico is incapable of indemnifying us 
in money. But she may do so by ceding to us 
territory which is useless to her, which she has 
not the ability to defend, and which may be useful 
to us. I have always been in favor of acquiring 
territory on just terms. The acquisition of Cali- 
fornia has always appeared to me very desirable, 
on account of its ports on the Pacific. I have 
uniformly voted for acquiring it, when the propo- 
sition has come before us. I believe, on the first 
occasion, 1 was in a minority of ten or eleven. 
.My opinion is unchanged. Indeed, it is confirmed 
by the fact, that California has, by our military 
operations, become forever detached from Mexico, 
if it were to be abandoned by us, its forty thou- 
sand inhabitants would undoubtedly establish an 
independent government for themselves, and they 
would maintain it if undisturbed by foreign inter- 
ference. I take the actual condition of things as I 
find it, and with an earnest desire to fulfil all the 
obligations it devolves on us in a spirit of justice to- 
wards Mexico and towards the people of California. 



11 



I concur also in what the honorable Senator 
from South Carolina has said in relation to the in- 
fluence of war on our political institutions. No 
man can deplore it under any circumstances, more 
than myself. Independently of the evils which it 
always brings in its train, there are considerations 
connected with our political organization and the 
nature of our social progress, which render it 
doubly pernicious in its tendencies. The final suc- 
cess of the experiment we are making in free gov- 
ernment may depend, in some degree, on a steady 
maintenance of the spir t of peace, in which our 
political system had its origin, and in which it has 
thus far been administereH. Great as is our ca- 
pacity for war, our whole scheme of goveriiment 
is averse to it. The greatest possible economy in 
expenditure; the least possible patron£ige in the 
hands of the Executive; the smallest pecuniary 
exactions from the people, consistent with our ab- 
solute wants; the aJisence of all demands on the 
public treasury, which call for unusual contribu- 
tions of revenue or promote excessive disburse- 
ments; the exemption of the country from all 
exigencies which devolve on the legislative and 
executive departments of the government the ex- 
ercise of extraordinary powers; — these are the con- 
ditions under which the ends of our political or- 
ganization are most likely to be fulfilled. Sir, none 
of these conditions belong to a state of war. Ex- 
travagant disbursements; extraordinary contribu- 
tions of revenue, present or prospective — present, 
in augmented burdens of taxation, prospective, in 
the shape of loans and anticipations of income, 
leading ultimately to taxation; extraordinary pow- 
ers summarily, and sometimes arbitrarily exer- 
cised; — these are the inseparable companions of 
war; and they are inimical to the very genius of 
our social system. 

There are considerations, which, in my judg- 
ment, render a war with Mexico peculiarly unfor- 
tunate, and which justify^ all the efforts we have 
made to bring it to an amicable termination. We 
are mutually engaged in carrying out on this con- 
tinent the experiment of free government, which 
in all other ages has proved aljortive. We are try- 
ing it under eminently auspicious circumstances. 
We have no strong Governments around us, found- 
ed upon antagonist principles, and adverse in their 
e.xample and influence to the success of ours. We 
are sustained by the faculty of popular representa- 
tion, which was unknown, or at least imperfectly 
known, to the free states of antiquity, and by 
force of which we have been enabled to carry out, 
on geographical areas of indefinite extent, an 
organization which had previously been deemed 
applicable only to communities of limited popula- 
tion and territory. It is natural, under these cir- 
cumstances, that the friends of free government, 
wherever they are to be found, should turn to us 
as the last hope of liberal institutions. They look 
to us for examples of moderation and forbearance 
in our intercoiu'se with foreign nations — especially 
those having forms of government analogous to 
our own — and for an exemption from the evil pas- 
sions which have embroiled the countries of the Old 
World, and involved them, century after century, 
with brief intermissions, in wars of ambition and 
revenge. In asserting the superiority of our own 
form of government, the strength of the argument 
will be weakened, if we shall be found no more 
exempt than those, which are less popular, from 



strife and contention with neighboring States. Re- 
garding the success of our institutions as affecting 
deeply the welfare of our race, and vindicating the 
competency of mankind to self-government, I have 
always esteemed it peculiarly unfortunate that any 
cause of alienation should have existed of sufft-^ 
cient magnitude to induce the two principal repub- 
lics of the western hemisphere to turn their arms 
against each other. The cause of liberal govern- 
ment is injured, and far more deeply injured, than 
it has been by the dissension of the republics in 
the southern portion of the American continent. 

These are considerations which it were well for 
us always to keep in view — in peace, that we may 
not rush hastily into war; in war, that we may 
spare no honorable effort for a restoration of 
peace. 

There is yet another consideration of a kindred 
character. While the monarchies of Europe are 
at peace with each other, and social improvement 
is advancing, on the continent at least, with unpar- 
alleled rapidity, almost the only wars now waging 
among neighboring States are between us and 
Mexico, and between some of the South American 
republics. I desire, as much as anyone can, to 
see these dissentions composed, and to see these 
republican States resume the fulfilment of their 
great mission among the nations — the maintenance 
of the principles of political liberty, and the culti- 
vation of the arts of civilization and peace. 

In these views I concur with the Senator from 
South Carolina. But here I am constrained to 
separate from him. When we come to practical 
measures, our paths lie wide apart. 

It is for the very reasons I have just stated, 
that I cannot assent to the policy he proposes. I 
believe it calculated to prolong the war, not to 
terminate it; to keep alive the spirit of animosity 
which divides us from Mexico, instead of restoring 
the friendly relations which ought to exist between 
us. I am in favor, then, of standing as we are. 
And, sir, if she shall refuse to make peace; if we 
must continue in the occupation of her capital and 
three-fourths of her territory, it may be in the 
order of Providence that we shall, through this 
very necessity, become the instruments of her po- 
litical and social regeneration. In the party con- 
flicts which distract her, the means may be found 
of consolidating her government on a republican 
basis, of healing her dissensions, and of^ uniting 
her to us in bonds of friendship by an exercise of 
magnanimity and forbearance in the final adjust- 
ment of our difficulties with her. I believe even 
now something of the salutary influence of our 
presence in. her capital and principal sea-ports, 
begins to be felt. The abolition of transit duties, 
the reduction of the impost on foreign articles of 
necessity and convenience, and a freer commerce 
among the Mexican State.?, may, if continued, 
strike a fatal blow at the anti-commercial system 
by which her people have been oppressed, and the 
internal abuses by which her rulers have grown 
rich — a system of mal-administration not even 
equalled by that which exists in old Spain. The 
higher improvement in government, in the arts, 
and in civilization under all its forms, which dis- 
tinguishes our own people, may, by force of actual 
contact, be communicated to tlie Mexicans, and 
lay the foundation of an improved social order. 
Startling as the reflection is, it is ne\ertheles3 
true, that civilization, and even Christianity, have 



12 



/nrtimos been propagated by arms, wlierc they 
/iuUI oihcrwisc liave been liopelessly excluded. 
Thus, the very passions wliitdi suein filled only to 
desolate human society, may, in the hands of 
Providence, become ihe agents of its advancement. 
Let u-s, then, hope and trust that the contest in 
which we are engaged with a neighboring |Mnvor, 
deplorable as we all consider il, may be an instru- 
ment of social and political amelioration to our 
adversary. 

The Senator from South Carolina has said, in his 
emphatic language, that we are "tied toacorpse." 
It is a .striking figure, Mr. President, and partakes 
strongly of the boldness in which the ilUi.jtrations 
of that disunguished Senator are always conceived. 
Mexico is, indeed, prostrate — almost politically 
inanimate, if you please — under the oppressions 
which have been heaped upon her, year after year, 
by unscrupulous rulers. Ikit I should be sorry to 
believe her beyond the power of resuscitation, 
even by human means. I do not expect, as our 
contact with her becomes more intimate, to see 
her, like the dead body touched by the bones of 
the prophet, spring, at a single bound, to life and 
strength. Dut 1 hope to see her — possibly through 
our instrumentality — freed fioui the despoticsway 
of her military rulers, and risini^, by sure degrees, 
to the national impiirtance I wish lier to possess — 
Older and tranquillity first, next social improve- 
ment and stable government, and at last an honor- 
able rank among the nations of the earth. I con- 
template no direct interference with her govern- 
ment — no permanent system of protection to be 
exercised over it — no alliance with her beyond 
what may be necessary to secure to us the objects 
of peace. But [ do contemplate a treaty, stipulat- 
ing for commercial arrangements, for protection 
and security to our own citizens in their future in- 
tercourse with her, and no withdrawal of our forces 
without il, at least until all chance of obtaining 
one shall prove hopeless. If we were to retire 
now, all commerce between her and us would cease 
and be transferred to our rivals, our frontier would 
be a line of war, not a boundary between peaceful 
neighbors; and unless the tide of conquest should 
be poured back upon her under the provocations 
such a condiliou of our relations would almost ne- 
ces.sarily superinduce, no citizen of the United 
Stales could be expected, for years to come, to plant 
his foot on Mexican soil. War dissolves the 
political and commercial relations of independent 
States, so far as they rest upon voluntary agree- 
ment. It is only by a treaty of peace that tiiey can 
be revived, or new relations be substituted for the 
old. 

_ Mr. President, advocating as I do the occupa- 
tion of Mexico until she shall consent to make 
peace, it may be incumbent on me to slate in what 
manner I think it can best be maintained. And 
here I must say, I think the estimates of the effect- 
ive force in the field have been greatly overstated. 
I propose no specific plan for adoption. I leave 
all practical measures in the hantis of those to 
whom they belong. I only purjiose to state what 
suggests itself to my mind, as advi.sable. I think 
we should find it most advantageous to remain 
much as we are, cxcc|:iting to occupy such ports 
on the Pacific as our fleet ni:iy reduce and maintain 
as commercial avenues to the interior. It may, 
however, become necessary to occujiy San Luis 
Potosi and Zacatccas for the protection of the 



mining operations in those Slates, and the agricul- 
tural districts near the city of Mexico, to command 
supplies for the army. 1 should consider an army 
of twenty-five thousand wetl-disciplined, effective 
men, the smallest number adequate to the purpose 
of maintaining positions, keeping open communi- 
cations from the coast to the interior, and dis|iers- 
ing the enemy's troops if they shall be recm- 
bodied; but in order to keep up such a force, we 
should require a nominal organization of at least 
forty thousand men, with full thirty thousand un- 
der pay. Without the general staff, ilie twenty- 
five regiments of regulars now in service, and the 
ten new regiments proposed by the bill, will con- 
siitute such a force; and when the latter shall 
be raised and brought into the field, a portion of 
the volunteers may be discharged, if it shall be 
found prudent to do so. Many of the regiments 
are greatly reduced in numbers, and, as I under- 
stand, are anxious to return home. I doubt now 
whether there are more than twenty-five thousand 
effective men in. all Alexico, though the rolls show 
over forty thousand. [General Cass, chairman 
of the Committee on Military Affairs, here said, 
the Adjutant General was of opinion that they did 
not exceed twenty-four thousand.] Some of the 
returns, on which the Adjutant General's report is 
founded, are of as early a tfate as August last. It 
will be recollected that last summer, when there 
was great anxiety in relation to General Scott, 
statements of the number of his troops were pub- 
lished here. Tliey were founded on the returns in 
the Adjutant General's oflice — and in his official 
report of the battles before the city of Mexico, 
General Scott complained that his force had been 
greatly overstated. He said it had been " trebled" 
in these returns, if I recollect rightly, and that the 
army had been " disgusted" by the exag2:eration. 
The returns of the army now should, in like man- 
ner, be subjected to great deductions in order to 
obtain the real effective force. If the ten regiments 
proposed by the bill are authorized, months will 
be required to raise them; they will not proliably, 
as the chairman of the Committee on Military 
Affairs has stated, give many more than seven 
thousand men, and in the mean time the 'army will 
become constantly diminished by the casualties of 
service. For these reasons, and for those ijiven — 
and so ably given — some days since by my honora- 
ble friend f^i-om Mississippi, [Mr. Davis,] I support 
the bill. I support it for another reason, which 
has governed me from the Cfunmenccment of the 
war: to place at the control of the Executive the 
men and means deemed necessary to bring it to 
an honorable termination. 

As hostilities are now suspended, the chief prov- 
ince of the army will be to maintain internal tran- 
quillity, support the civil authorities in the execu- 
tion of the laws, to free the country fi'Oin the robber 
and guerrilla bands by which it is infested, ani sub- 
serve the great purposes of government by aftnrd- 
ing security to liberty, property, and life — a security 
the Mexicans have not often fully enjoyed. The 
very exercise of these beneficent agencies will tend 
to disarm hostility towards us with the thinking 
portion of the population. It will place our armies 
m a most favorable contrast with hers, which have 
been scourges i-alher than pi'otectors to their own 
countrymen. I would, if possible, have no more 
bloodshed. I would make our armies the protect- 
ors, not the enemies of the Mexican people, and 



13 



render them siil^servientto theeradication of abuses 
and to tlie institution of a belter civil administra- 
tion, under Mexican magistrates, al)staitiii)g from 
ail interference with the frame of the government, 
and changfng in its action only what, b)' uiiiver^^al 
consent, requires to be changed. If this course 
were to be adopted and steadily pursued, I should 
earnestly hope its effect would be, at no distant 
time, to make the capital, under our protection, 
the centre of an influence which would lead to the 
reestablishment of the federative system on a du- 
rable basis, and give to that distracted country the 
settled order which is alcne necessary to make her 
happy and prosperous. 

To abandon the city of Mexico would, I fear, 
put an end to all these prospects and liopes. That 
city is the political as well as the financial centre 
of the Repul)lic. It is there governments have been 
instituted and deposed, armies levied, revenue sys- 
tems devised and carried into execution. So long 
as we hold it and control the adjoining districts, 1 
believe nothing but imprudence or mismanagement 
can raise uj) a formidable opposition to us. If we 
abandon it, all the resources of the country, which 
it commands, will again be at the control of its 
rulers, to be employed against us in the renewal 
of active hostilities. Before it was captured, en- 
ergetic movements seemed to me our true policy. 
Now that it is in our undisputed possession, our 
leading object should be to introduce better com- 
mercial and financial systems, and let them work 
out under our protection their legitimate results. 

Great qualities are necessary in him who is 
charged with the execution of these delicate and 
responsible functions. He should have prudence, 
self-control, a knowledge of civil affairs, of the 
country, of the people, and their character, and, if 
possible, their language. Established institutions, 
existing usages, sometimes prejudices, even, must 
be respected. Some of the most disastrous re- 
verses which have befallen armies of occupation, 
have had their origin in violations of the prevailing 
customs and feelings of the people. To avoid this 
fatal error, everything depends on the discretion 
and wi.sdoin of the directing authority. 

It may be, that all reasonable expectations will 
be disappointed; that the hostility of Mexico will 
prove unappeasable; that she will prefer the politi- 
cal disorganization, which now exists, to an ami- 
cable arrangement with us. If so, circumstances 
must dictate the course to be pursued when this 
conviction shall be forced on us. But, sir, let us 
not adopt such a conclusion hastily. Let us rely 
on the influence of more rational motives to give 
us peace. 

And now, sir, I submit whether this course had 
not better be pursued for a while, if I am right in 
supposing the temporary occupation of Mexico, 
under discreet officers, may lead to a stable peace, 
rather than to withdraw our forces, and leave the 
adjustment of difficulties to the uncertain chance 
of a restoration of a responsible government, to be 
terminated at last, perhaps, by the renewed arbit- 
rement of arms. 

I liave thus stated with frankness the views I en- 
tertain in respect to the future conduct of the war. 
Notwithstanding the anxious consideration I have 
given to the sulyect, they may be erroneous. It is 
a question of great difficulty, on which difl'erences 
of opinion may well exist, and on which a mis- 
taken course of policy may lead to the most un- 
pleasant, consequences. Whatever faith I may 



entertain in tlie soundness of the opinions I have 
advanced, I certainly should liave more if they 
were not totally at variance with those of gentle- 
men possessing, from longer experience, much 
higher claims than myself to puMie confidence. 
But I have not on this account thought proper to 
withhold them, knowing, as we do, that, from the 
very contrariety and conflict of thou^'ht and con- 
viction, valuable deductions may sometimes be 
drawn. 

Mr. President, I feel that I have already tres- 
passed toolongon the indulgcnceof the Senate; but 
I am unwilling to close without askitig its attention 
for a very few moments to some considerations 
connected with our future growth and progress, 
and with the influence we must, in spite of our- 
selves, exert over the destinies of Mexico. They 
arc no new opinions: they have been expressed 
years ago, both in public and private. 

Sir, no one who has paid a moderate degree of 
attention to the laws and elements of our increase, 
can doubt that our population is destined to spread 
itself across the American continent, filling up, 
with more or less completeness, according to at- 
tractions of soil and climate, the space that inter- 
venes between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. 
This eventual, and, perhaps, in the order of time, 
this not very distant extension of our settlements 
over a tract of country, with a diameter, as we go 
westward, greatly disproportioned to its length, 
becomes a subject of the highest interest to us. On 
the whole extent of our northern flank, from New 
Brunswick to the point where the northern bound- 
ary of Oregon touches the Pacific, we are in con- 
tact with British colonists, having, for the most 
part, the same common origin v/ith ourselves, but 
controlled and moulded by political influences from 
the Eastern hemisphere, if not adverse, certainly 
not decidedly friendly to us. The strongest, tie 
which can be relied on to bind us to mutual oflices 
of friendship and good neighborhood, is that of 
commerce; and this, as we know, is apt to run 
into rivalry, and sometimes becomes a fruitful 
source of alienation. 

From our northern boundary, we turn to our 
southern. What races are to border on us here, 
what is to be their social and political character, 
and what their means of annoyance? Are our 
two frontiers, only seven parallels of latitude apart 
when we pass Texas, to be flanked by settlements 
having no common bond of union with ours? Our 
whole southern line is conterminous, throughout its 
whole extent, with the territories of Mexico, a 
large portion of which is nearly unpopulated. The 
geographical area of Mexico is about ],. 500,000 
square miles, and her population about 7,000,000 
snuls. The whole norihern and central portion, 
taking the twenty-sixth parallel of latitude as 
the dividing line, containing more than 1,000,000 
square miles, has about 650,000 inhabitants — • 
about two inhabitasils to three square miles. The 
southern portion, with less than 500,000 square 
miles, has a population of nearly six and a half 
millions of souls, or thirteen inhabitania to one 
square mile. The aboriginal races, which occupy 
and overrun a portion of California and New Mex- 
ico, must there, as everywhere else, give way be- 
fore the advancing wave of civilization, either to be 
overwhelmed by it, or to be driven upon perpetu- 
ally contracting areas, wliere, from a diminution of 
their accustomed sources of subsistence, they must 
ultimately become extinct by force of an invincible 



14 



We soc tlie opcrnlion of tliis Inw in every 
)n of this continent. We Imve no power to 
iriA it, if we would. It is the behest of Pri>vi- 
^enee that idleness, mid ifjnorance, iind harharism, 
shall give plaee lo in<lustry, and knowledge, and 
civilization. The European and mixed races, 
whicli possess Mexico, are not likely, eitiier from 
moral or physical energy, to become formidable 
rivals or enemies. The bold and courageous cn- 
terjiri.se which overran and conquered Mexico, 
appears not to have descended to the present pos- 
sessors of the soil. Either from the influence of 
climate or the admixture of races — the fusion of 
castes, to use the technical phrase — the conquer- 
ors have, in turn, become the conquered. The 
ancient Castilian energy is, in a great degree, sul)- 
ducd ; and it has given place, with many other iioiilc 
traits of the Spanish character, to a peculiarity 
which seems to have marked the race in that coun- 
try, under whatever combinations it is found — a 
rronencss to civil discord, and a suicidal waste of 
Its own strength. 

With such a territory and such a people on our 
southern border, what is to be the inevitable 
course of empire ? It needs no powers of prophecy 
to foretell. Sir, I desire to speak plainly: why 
should we not, when we are discussing the opera- 
lion of moral and physical laws, which are beyond 
our control.' As our population moves westward 
on our own territory, p(>rtions will cross our south- 
ern boundary. Settlements will be formed within 
the unoccupied and sparsely-peopled territory of 
Mexico. Uncongenial habits and tastes, differ- 
ences of political opinion and principle, and num- 
berless other elements of diversity will lead to a 
separation of these newly-formed societies from 
the inefficient government of Mexico. They will 
not endure to be held in subjection to a system, 
which neither yields them protection nor offers 
any incentive to their proper development and 
growth. They will form independent States on 
the basis of constitutions identical in all their lead- 
ing features with our own; and they will naturally 
seek to unite their fortunes to our.s. The fate of 
California is already sealed: it can never be re- 
united to Mexico. The operation of the great 
causes, to which I have alluded, must, at no dis- 
tant day, detach the whole of northern Mexico 
from the southern portion of that republic. It is 
for the very reason that she is incapable of de- 
fending her possessions against the elements of 
disorder withm and the progress of better influences 
from without, that I desire to see the inevitable 
political change which is to be wrought in the 
condition of her northern departments, brought 
about without any improper interference on our 

Fart. I do not speak of our military movements. 
refer to the time when our difficulties with her 
shall be healed, and when she shall be left to 
the operation of pacific influences — silent, but more 
powerful than the arm of force. For the reason 
that she is defencelsss, if for no other, I should be 
opposed to all schemes of conquest. Acquisition 
by force is the vice of arbitrary governments. I 
desire never to see it the reproach of ours. For 
the sake of the national honor, as well as the per- 
manency of our politic^il institutions, I desire not 
to see it. The extension of free government on 
this continent can only be arrested, if arrested at 
all, by substituting war for the arts of peace. 
Leave it to itself, and nothing can prevent tlie 
progress of our population across the continent. 



^tr. Ji-fforson, with liis prophetic forecast, foretold 
this result forty years ago. He prophesied the 
peaceful progress of our peojile to the Pacific. He 
foresaw them forming new settlements, qnd, when 
strong enough to maintain themselves, organizing 
independent societies and governing themselves by 
constitutions and laws analagous to bur own. It 
is true, he believed the area of freedom might be 
enlarged, advantageously to ourselves and others, 
without extending to the same broad limits the 
area of our jurisdiction. It was the progress and 
the triumph of great principles of political right, to 
which his philoso])hical mind instinctively turned 
as to the legitimate aim and boundary of our am- 
bition and desires. Since his day the public mind 
in this country has greatly outrun his anticipations 
of our progress. It looks to the extension of our 
Constitution and laws over regions which were 
formerly considered beyond our reach as integral 
portions of the same system of government. Mod- 
ern improvements have given great strength to this 
prevailing sentiment. It is possiljle by steam 
power, if we can succeed in making the proper ap- 
plication of it, over so broad a surface, to reach 
the Pacific ocean from Lake Michigan, or the Mis- 
sissippi, in eight or nine days — a period of time 
less than that which was required to travel from 
Boston to Pliiladelphia, when the Congress of the 
American colonies first assembled in the latter city. 
Under these circumstances, the extension of our 
political boundary so as to embrace all territory we 
may justly call our own, seems no longer to be 
considered a questionable policy. If other dis- 
tricts, not now within the territories of the Union, 
shall found independent governments, and shall 
desire to unite themselves to us on terms mutually 
acceptable, it is a question which concerns only 
them and us, and in which no stranger can be per- 
mitted to intrude. When the time comes for the 
settlement of any such questions, they will doubt- 
less be considered with all the solemnity which 
belongs to propositions involving the public wel- 
fare. To those with whom the decision belongs 
let us leave them, with the assurance that the wis- 
dom which has governed and guided us so long, 
will still point out to us the path of liberty, tran- 
quillity and safety. 

One position we have assumed, and I trust it 
will be maintained with inflexible firmness — that 
no Power beyond this continent can be permitted 
to interfere with our progress, so long as there is 
on our part no violation of its own rights. I would 
resist, at the outset, as matter of the gravest 
offence, all indications of such interference. If the 
abstract right could be asset ted on grounds of in- 
ternational law, there has been nothing in the 
nature of our extension, or the means by which it 
has been accomplished, to warrant its application 
to us. From the formation of our Government, 
for nearly three-quarters of a century, military 
{lower — brute force — has had no agency in the con- 
quests we have achieved. We have overrun no 
provinces or countries abounding in wealth. Our 
capital has witnessed no triumphal entries of re- 
turning armies, bearing with them the spoils and 
tro{>hies of conquest. Our ships have not been 
seen returning from subjugated districts, freighted 
with the tributes of an extended commerce. In 
the extension of our commercial intercourse, we 
have not, like our Anglo-Saxon mother, been seen 
hewing down with the sword, with unrelenting 
and remorseless determination, every obstacle 



15 



whicli opposed itself to Iicr progress. Our career 
thus far lias been stained by no such conipanioii- 
sliip with evil. Our conquests have been the peace- 
ful achievements of enterprise and industry — the 
one leading the way into the wilderness, the other 
following and com])leting the acquisition by the 
formal symbols of occupancy and possession. 
They jiave looked to no objects beyond the con- 
version of uninhabited wilds into abodes of civili- 
zation and freedom. Their only arms were the 
axe and the ploughsliare. The accumulations of 
wealth they havebrouirhl were all extracted from the 
bosom of the earth by the unc (lending hand of labor. 
If, in the progress of ourpeoplc westward, they shall 
occupy territories not our own, but to become ours 
by amicable arrangements with the governments 
to which they belong, which of the nations of the 
earth shall venture to stand forth, in the face of 
the civilized world, and call on us to pause in this 
great work of human improvement ? It is as much 
the interest of Europe as it is ours, that we should 
be permitted to follow undisturbed the path which, 
in the allotment of national fortunes, we seem ap- 
pointed to tread. Our country has long been a 
refuge for those who desire a lai-ger liberty than 
they enjoy under their own rulers. It is an outlet 
for the political disaffection of the Old World — 
for social elements which might there have be- 
come sources of agitation, but which are here si- 
lently and tranquilly incorporated into our system, 
ceasing to be principles of disturbance as they at- 
tain the greater freedom, which was the object of 
their separation from less congenial combinations 
in other quarters of the globe. Nay, more; it is 
into the vast reservoir of the western wilderness, 
teeming with fruilfulnessand fertility, that Europe 
is constantly pouring, under our protection, her 
human surplusses, unable to draw from her own 
bosom the elements of their support and repro- 
duction. She is literally going along with us in 
our march to prosperity and power, to share with 
us its triumphs and its fruits. Happily, this con- 
tinent is not a legitimate theatre for the politi- 
cal arrangements of the sovereigns of the eastern 
hemisphere. Their armies may range, undis- 
turbed by us, over the plains of Europe, Asia, 
and Africa, dethroning monarchs, partitioning 
kingdoms, and subverting republics, as interest or 
caprice may dictate. But political justice demands 
that in one quarter of the globe self-government, 
freedom, the arts of peace, shall be permitted to 
work out, unmolested, the great purposes of hu- 
man civilization 

Mr. President, I trust there will be nothing in 
the final adjustment of our difficulties with Mexico 
to impair, in any degree, the moral of our example 
in the past. Our course, heretofore, has been one 
of perpetual exertion to bring about an amicable 
arrangement with her. I trust we shall persevere 
in the same course of conduct, whatever unwilling- 
ness she may exhibit to come to terms. Etiter- 
taining the opinions which 1 have expressed, I 
naturally feel a deep solicitude, as an American 
citizen, that our pul)lic conduct should comport 
with the dignity of the part we seem destined to 

ferform in the great drama of international politics, 
desire to see our good name unsullied, and the 
character we have gained for moderation, justice, 
and scrupulousness in the discharije of our na- 
tional obligations, maintained unimpaired. In 
these, let us be assured, our great strength consists: 



for it is these which make us strong in the opinion 
of mankind. 

In what I have said concerning the progress of 
our people over the unpopulated regions west of 
us, and in respect to our responsibilities as a nation, 
I trust I shall have incurred no imputation of in- 
consistency. On the contrary, I trust I shall be 
considered consistent in all I have said. I regard 
our extension, as I have endeavored to fore- 
shadow it, to be the inevitable result of causes, the 
operation of which it is not in our power to arrest. 
At the same time, I hold it to be our sacred duty 
to see" that it is not encouraged or promoted by 
improper means. While I should consider it the 
part of weakness to shrink from extension, under 
the apprehension that it might bring with it the 
elements of discord and disunion, as our political 
boundaries are enlarged, I should hold it to be the 
part of folly and dishonor to attempt to accelerate 
it by agencies incompatible with our obligations 
to other nations. It is the dictate of wisdom and 
of duty to submit ourselves to the operation of the 
great causes which are at work, and which will 
work on in spite of us, in carrying civilization and 
freedom across t^je American continent. 

In advocating a continued occupation of the 
cities and territory we have acquired in Mexico, 
until she shall assent to reasonable terms of peace, 
I trust also that I shall be deemed consistent with 
myself. Deprecating war as the greatest of ca- 
lamities, especially for us, I desire to see this war 
brought to a close at the earliest practicable day. 
I am in favor of whatever measures are most likely 
to accomplish this desirable end. I am opposed 
to an abandonment of our position: 

1st. Because I believe it would open a field of 
domestic dissension in Mexico, which might be 
fatal to her existence as an independent state, or 
make her take refuge in the arms of despotism; 

2d. Because it might lead to external interference 
in her affairs of the most dangerous tendency both 
to her and us; and 

3d. Because I fear that we should only gain a 
tem(iorary suspension of hostilities, to be renewed 
undergreatdisadvantagestous,and with every pros- 
pect of a longer and more sanguinary contest. 

Mr. President, it is this last consideration, which 
weighs most heavily upon my own mind. I hold 
it to be indispensable to the public welfare, under 
all its aspects, that we should have, at the termi- 
nation of this contest, a solid and stable peace. 
Unpromising as the condition of things seems at 
the present moment, my hope still is, that firmness 
tempered with pruden'-e, will give us, not a mere 
outward pacification with secret irritation rankling 
within, but substantial concord and friendship, 
which shall leave no wound unhealed. And, sir, 
we should be satisfied with nothing short of an 
accommodation of diiTerences which will enable 
the country with confidence to lay aside its armor, 
and to resume the peaceful pursuits to which, by 
the inexorable law of our condition, we must look 
for prosperity and safety. 

My advice, then, (if I may presume to advise,) 
is, to stand firm, holding ourselves ready at all 
times to make a peace, and carrying into our nego- 
tiations for that purpose a determination to cement 
a future good understanding with our adver.sary, 
by an adjustment of our differences on terms of jus- 
tice, moderation, and magnanimity. 



LTBRftRV OF CONGRESS 
111 lii ll lili iili III" I'l^l I ^' S' e A 

011 445 849 6 • 



